Estimating a Total Demand Function for Sea Angling Pursuits

Ecological Economics

Volumn 134, Issue , 2017, Pages 73-81

  Hynes, Stephen ^a   Gaeven, Rainey ^b,d   O'Reilly, Paul ^c  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

^b California Coastal Commission   (United States)

^c INLAND FISHERIES IRELAND   (Ireland)

^d MONTEREY INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Count data models; Endogenous stratification; Sea angling recreation demand; Sea bass; Truncation

Indexed keywords

ANGLING; DEMAND ANALYSIS; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; PERCIFORM; RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; STRATIFICATION; SUSTAINABILITY;

IRELAND;

SERRANIDAE;

EID: 85009874461     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.024     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Armstrong, M., Brown, A., Hargreaves, J., Hyder, K., Pilgrim-Morrison, S., Munday, M., Proctor, S., Roberts, A., Williamson, K., Sea Angling 2012 – A Survey of Recreational Sea Angling Activity and Economic Value in England. 2013, Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Report, UK.
2. Beville, S., Kerr, G., Hughey, K., Valuing impacts of the invasive alga Didymosphenia geminata on recreational angling. Ecol. Econ. 82 (2012), 1–10.
3. Beaumont, N., Austen, M., Mangi, S., Townsend, M., Economic valuation for the conservation of marine biodiversity. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 56 (2008), 386–396.
4. Bilgic, A., Florkowski, W., Application of a hurdle negative binomial count data model to demand for bass fishing in the southeastern United States. J. Environ. Manag. 83:4 (2007), 478–490.
5. Cameron, A., Trivedi, P., Econometric models based on count data: comparisons and application of some estimators and tests. J. Appl. Econ. 1 (1986), 29–53.
6. Curtis, J., Estimating the demand for salmon angling in Ireland. Econ. Soc. Rev. 33:3 (2002), 319–332.
7. Creel, M., Loomis, J., Theoretical and empirical advantages of truncated count data estimators for analysis of deer hunting in California. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 72 (1990), 434–441.
8. Edwards, S., An Economics Guide to Allocation of Fish Stocks Between Commercial and Recreational Fisheries. NOAA Technical Report. 94, 1990, US National Marine Fisheries Service NMFS.
9. Englin, J., Shonkwiler, J., Estimating social welfare using count data models: an application to long-run recreation demand under conditions of endogenous stratification and truncation. Rev. Econ. Stat. 77 (1995), 104–112.
10. Greene, W., Econometric Analysis. sixth ed., 2007, Pearson Prentice Hall Publishing, New York.
11. Haab, T., McConnell, K., Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: The Econometrics of Non-market Valuation. 2002, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK.
12. Haab, T., Whitehead, J., McConnell, T., The economic value of marine recreational fishing in the southeast United States: 1997 southeast economic data analysis. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, 446, 2001, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC.
13. Hanley, N., Barbier, E., Pricing Nature: Cost-benefit Analysis and Environmental Policy. 2009, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK.
14. Hicks, R., Gautam, A., Van Voorhees, D., Osborn, M., Gentner, B., An introduction to the NMFS marine recreational fisheries statistics survey with an emphasis on economic valuation. Mar. Resour. Econ. 14:4 (1999), 375–385.
15. Hynes, S., O'Reilly, P., Corless, R., An on-site versus a household survey approach to modelling the demand for recreational angling: do welfare estimates differ?. Ecosyst. Serv. 16 (2015), 136–145.
16. Hynes, S., Greene, W., A panel travel cost model accounting for endogenous stratification and truncation: a latent class approach. Land Econ. 89:1 (2013), 177–192.
17. Hynes, S., Hanley, N., Preservation versus development on Irish rivers: whitewater kayaking and hydro power in Ireland. Land Use Policy 23 (2006), 170–180.
18. ICES, ICES Advice on Fishing Opportunities, Catch, and Effort Celtic Seas and Greater North Sea Ecoregions. 2016 (http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2016/2016/bss-47.pdf).
19. Inland Fisheries Ireland, The Economic Contribution of Bass and Sea Angling in Ireland. 2015, IFI publication, Dublin.
20. Jobstvogt, N., Watson, V., Kenter, J., Looking below the surface: the cultural ecosystem service values of UK marine protected areas (MPAs). Ecosyst. Serv. 10 (2014), 97–110.
21. Johnstone, C., Markandya, A., Valuing river characteristics using combined site choice and participation travel cost models. J. Environ. Manag. 80 (2006), 237–247.
22. Kerkvliet, J., Nowell, C., Tools for recreation management in parks: the case of the greater Yellowstone's blue-ribbon fishery. Ecol. Econ. 34:1 (2000), 89–100.
23. Lawrence, K., Assessing the value of recreational sea angling in South West England. Fish. Manag. Ecol. 12 (2005), 369–375.
24. Lew, D., Larson, D., Stated preferences for size and bag limits of Alaska charter boat anglers. Mar. Policy 61 (2015), 66–76.
25. Loomis, J., Travel cost demand model based river recreation benefit estimates with on-site and household surveys: comparative results and a correction procedure. Water Resour. Res., 39(4), 2003, 1105.
26. Loomis, J., Rosenberger, R., Shrestha, R., Updated Estimates of Recreation Values for the RPA Program by Assessment Region and Use of Meta-analysis for Recreation Benefit Transfer. Final Report for the USDA Forest Service. 1999, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.
27. Loomis, J., Walsh, R., Recreation Economic Decisions: Comparing Benefits and Costs. second ed., 1997, Venture Publishing, Inc., Pennsylvania.
28. Martınez-Espineira, R., Amoako-Tuffour, J., Recreation demand analysis under truncation, overdispersion, and endogenous stratification: an application to Gros Morne National Park. J. Environ. Manag. 88:4 (2007), 1320–1332.
29. Martínez-Espiñeira, R., Loomis, J., Amoako-Tuffour, J., Hilbe, J., Comparing recreation benefits from on-site versus household surveys in count data travel cost demand models with overdispersion. Tour. Econ. 14:3 (2008), 567–576.
30. Martínez-Espiñeira, R., Hilbe, J., Effect on recreation benefit estimates from correcting for on-site sampling biases and heterogeneous trip overdispersion in count data recreation demand models (STATA). J. Mod. Appl. Stat. Methods, 7(1), 2008 (Article 29).
31. McConnell, K., Strand, I., Volume II: The Economic Value of Mid and South Atlantic Sportfishing, Report on Cooperative Agreement #CR-811043-0-0. 1994, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
32. Meisner, C., Wang, H., Welfare Measurement Bias in Household and On-site Surveying of Water-based Recreation: An Application to Lake Sevan, Armenia. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series No. 3932. 2006.
33. Mkwara, L., Marsh, D., Scarpa, R., The effect of within-season variability on estimates of recreational value for trout anglers in New Zealand. Ecol. Econ. 119 (2015), 338–345.
34. Murdock, J., Handling unobserved site characteristics in random utility models of recreation demand. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 51 (2006), 1–25.
35. O'Neill, C., Davis, J., Alternative definitions of demand for recreational angling in northern Ireland. J. Agric. Econ. 42:2 (1991), 174–179.
36. Parsons, G., The travel cost model. Champ, P.A., Boyle, K.J., Brown, T.C., (eds.) A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation, 2003, Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht.
37. Prayaga, P., Rolfe, J., Stoeckl, N., The value of recreational fishing in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia: a pooled revealed preference and contingent behaviour model. Mar. Policy: Int. J. Ocean Aff. 34:2 (2010), 244–251.
38. Pyo, H., Park, C., Chung, J., Estimating consumer surplus for recreational sea fishing using individual travel cost method. Ocean Polar Res. 30:2 (2008), 141–148.
39. Raguragavan, J., Hailu, A., Burton, M., Economic valuation of recreational fishing in Western Australia: state wide random utility modelling of fishing site choice behaviour. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 57:4 (2013), 539–558.
40. Shaw, D., On-site sample's regression: problems of non-negative integers, truncation, and endogenous selection. J. Econ. 37 (1988), 211–223.
41. Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), 46th Plenary Meeting Report (PLEN-14-02). 2014, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
42. Shrestha, R.K., Seidl, A.F., Moraes, A.S., Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models. Ecol. Econ. 42:1 (2002), 289–299.
43. Stolk, P., Angling Participation. Interim Report. 2009, Substance, Manchester (http://resources.anglingresearch.org.uk/sites/resources.anglingresearch.org.uk/files/Research_Task_1_Angling_Participation.pdf).
44. Tinch, R., Mathieu, L., Anderson, S., Radford, A., Comparing Industry Sector Values, With a Case Study of Commercial Fishing and Recreational Sea Angling. 2015, UKFEN –SEAFISH report, Edinburgh.
45. Tourism Development International, Socio-Economic Study of Recreational Angling in Ireland. 2013, Inland Fisheries Ireland Report, Dublin.
46. Ward, F., Beal, D., Valuing Nature With Travel Cost Models: A Manual. 2000, Edward Elgar, UK.
47. Whelan, B., March, G., An Economic Evaluation of Irish Angling. A Report Prepared for the Central Fisheries Board by the Economic and Social Research Institute. 1988, ESRI, Dublin.
48. Williams, C., Carpenter, G., European Sea Bass in the UK: A Test Case for Implementing Article 17 of the Reformed CFP. 2015, New Economics Foundation working paper, London.